History Channel

"arjay" schreef in bericht
news
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
m...
Robert Sveinson wrote:

RAF accuracy was as good if not better than that of
the USAAF if the target was vivible.

Did the USAAF precisely hit any target such as
the TIRPITZ, the Dortmund Ems canal,
the Saumur Tunnel, various Gestapo buildings,
the Antheor Viaduct, Amiens Prison?

Yes.

No! I have never heard of any!

That you haven't heard of any does not mean it didn't occur, it means
you're ignorant.

Then -- with respect -- it seems your place to provide enlightenment.
If Robert Sveinson is ignorant because he has not heard of "any" USAAF
achievements of precision strikes, one bomb per aircraft, in the ETO then
this implies that there were several such strikes. And your calling him
"ignorant" suggests you know of at least two of them.
Where, and when did they occur?


And suddenly it became very quiet.

Reason? The USAF only started using precision bombing in Vietnam (in the
sixties) when they realised that:
1. Carpet bombing did not make them very popular with the local people;
2. Carpet bombing ws not very effective;
3. Precison bombing was the only effective way of taking out specific
targets (the Paul Doumer bridge for instance).

Regards,
Herman

Graham Sheldon wrote:
"®i©ardo" wrote in message
...
Graham Sheldon wrote:
Talking about "The Sound Barrier" as a work of fiction showing the
British achieving supersonic flight, I seem to recall reading/hearing
somewhere that in actual fact the British were well advanced in
researching this and had designed and built an aeroplane - the Miles M52
I think - which could well have achieved this. Then the US and British
Governments decided they would pool their research to achieve it. So the
British handed over all their info to the US who then refused to hand
over their info, due to "security reasons". The British did not proceed
any further but the US continued on (now with the benefit of all the
British research and design) and eventually produce the Bell X-1 - which
looks suspiciously like the Miles M52 - and do the deed!

Sounds a bit like the atomic bomb development with Britain and Canada
having been major contributors, then being told to p*ss off by the Yanks.

The British, using Canadian uranium and plutonium and the worlds largest
stockpile of heavy water and hydro-electric power, had actually done the
majority of the leg-work already, leaving the American-funded Manhatten
Project to do the rest.

President Truman the reneged on FDR's promise to Churchill to share the
atom bombs.


For military movie fiction you can't "The Sound Barrier"
showing the British being the first to achieve supersonic
flight.

I remember seeing "The Sound Barrier" in the year of its release, and
my
memories of it stretch back that far. If you have access to a VHS or
DVD
home version, please correct me ... but ... the film presents a
disclaimer
that it is a piece of fiction, and if despite that it seems more
truthful
than most works of fiction then that may be due to the skill of the
director, David Lean; it was acknowledged in the film that the sound
barrier
had already been overcome by an American aviator, without, as I
remember,
any mention being made that the American aircraft was not jet- but
rocket-powered; and the whole thing is really about Geoffrey de
Havilland's
fatal semi-success in the DH 108 Swallow, when he tickled Mach 1 but
didn't
survive.

--
Moving things in still pictures!

--
Moving things in still pictures!

I seem to remember also after WW2 the British were well advanced with jet
engine technology and virtually handed all the plans, etc over for the
Russians to have a look at. And then the world was shocked when the
Mig-15 showed up in Korea with a Russian copy of the British jet engine.
What is it with the poms? And then there was Duncan Sands (or however he
spells it) and his infamous white paper which destroyed the British aero
industry almost overnight...


Not *all* the plans. The Russians were provided with an example of the
Rolls Royce Nene and Derwent jet engines.

Britain handed over far, far more to America in that line.

America's first jet fighter, the XP-59A Airocomet, only got off the
ground thanks to the engine and technology provided by Britain.

--
Moving things in still pictures!

"Herman" wrote in message
.home.nl...
"arjay" schreef in bericht
news
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
m...
Robert Sveinson wrote:

RAF accuracy was as good if not better than that of
the USAAF if the target was vivible.

Did the USAAF precisely hit any target such as
the TIRPITZ, the Dortmund Ems canal,
the Saumur Tunnel, various Gestapo buildings,
the Antheor Viaduct, Amiens Prison?

Yes.

No! I have never heard of any!

That you haven't heard of any does not mean it didn't occur, it means
you're ignorant.

Then -- with respect -- it seems your place to provide enlightenment.
If Robert Sveinson is ignorant because he has not heard of "any" USAAF
achievements of precision strikes, one bomb per aircraft, in the ETO then
this implies that there were several such strikes. And your calling him
"ignorant" suggests you know of at least two of them.
Where, and when did they occur?

And suddenly it became very quiet.

Reason? The USAF only started using precision bombing in Vietnam (in the
sixties) when they realised that:
1. Carpet bombing did not make them very popular with the local people;
2. Carpet bombing ws not very effective;
3. Precison bombing was the only effective way of taking out specific
targets (the Paul Doumer bridge for instance).

Well ... as to starting precision bombing only in Viet Nam ... not quite.
The U.S.A.A.F. did make a few attempts during WW2, largely prompted by
Germany's use of the anti-shipping Henschel glide bomb.
The U.S. developed and used two guided bombs -- the AZON (AZimuth ONly)
radio-controlled weapon and the Bat glide-bomb, which was radar-controlled.
The AZON was used, with limited success, in the ETO against a few bridges.
The device was a tail attachment for a standard 1,000-lb bomb, and it took
several hits from those things to knock down a bridge. No 'one bomb per
aircraft' successes there.
The AZON was also used in the PTO against bridges on the Burma railway.
Such reports as I can find indicate it usually took three or four hits to
knock down a bridge there. I can find nothing indicating how many were
dropped, but missed their targets, nor any identification of which bridges
were attacked.
The Bat glide-bomb -- which depended on centimetric radar, and thus couldn't
have been built without British research into the cavity magnetron -- was
not a great success. Intended as an anti-shipping weapon for the Pacific,
it kept hitting trees, coral reefs and anything large along a coastline.
The USAF did try some precision attacks during the Korean affair -- six
bridges were claimed destroyed by the so-called Tarzon bomb. That was an
improved AZON system attached to -- guess what? -- the British Tallboy bomb.

Regards,
Herman

"®i©ardo" wrote in message
...
arjay wrote:
"Mitchell Holman" wrote in message
...
®i©ardo wrote in news:mGP%j.75386$zc6.60120
@newsfe29.ams2:
Mitchell Holman wrote:
"Robert Sveinson" wrote in news:euI%j.98$t07.25
@newsfe22.lga:
"Mitchell Holman" wrote in message
...
"Robert Sveinson" wrote in news:7Gm%j.31$%g5.8
@newsfe13.lga:
"GC" wrote in message
...

biggish snip

As to "Bridge Over the River Kwai" -- also a David Lean film, as you
noted -- if there's blame to be handed out, blame Pierre Boulle for
writing the hit novel on which the film is based, and for turning several
stiff-necked and stupid French army officers he had known in Indo-China
into
the one stiff-necked and stupid English officer played by Alec Guinness.
The novel (and the film) were meant to outline the torments of the POWs
building the bridge, not glorify the heroism or achievement of those
destroying it. Besides -- the film has the bridge destroyed in 1943, and
in a manner that exploits cinematic story-telling. The actual
destruction of
the bridge in 1945 by the 458th Heavy Bombardment Group, U.S.A.A.F,
wouldn't have made much of a movie.

Ah, an eloquent lurker.

Thank you for your well expressed comments.

And thanks for your note of appreciation. I could only wish that my
comments had not been so hastily researched.
Novellist Pierre Boulle wrote his book without ever having been to the site
of the bridge in question.
Therefore he did not know 1) that there were actually two bridges, one wood,
one concrete and steel, both completed in 1943 or 2) that the bridges did
not cross the River Kwai (or Kwae) at all.
The railway followed that river for many miles, but in fact crossed a
tributary -- the Mae Khlung River.
Neither bridge was ever attacked by S.O.E. agents.
Both were destroyed in 1945 by aerial bombardment.
I erred in crediting the 458th Heavy Bombardment Group, U.S.A.A.F. That
unit saw action in the ETA as part of the 8th Air Force but never got to the
Pacific.
There is much confusion over who really destroyed the bridges, and at least
three competing claims are made.
Some votes have been cast for the 490th Bombardment Squadron, U.S.A.A.F.,
but they seem to have used B-25s in their raids.
7th Bomb Group, 10th U.S. Air Force, flying B-24s out of India, claims
hitting both bridges in February, 1945, making the steel bridge unusable but
only damaging the wooden structure. This was followed in April by a single
aircraft raid, a B-24 of the 436th Bombardment Squadron, which destroyed the
wooden bridge after several low-level passes and as many bombs.
And then there was Roy Borthwick, an RCAF flight lieutenant on loan to the
R.A.F.'s 159 Squadron near Calcutta. They flew B-24s, and Borthwick flew
one of eleven in a June, 1945 raid against those bridges (apparently both
repaired since the raids of February and April). Borthwick made five
passes, dropped a 1000-lb bomb on each, and destroyed a span of the steel
bridge.

I don't think anyone really knows who finally knocked the bridges down.
But it was Pierre Boulle and David Lean who made them famous -- so famous
that after 1957 tourists went to Thailand looking for the "Kwai River
Bridge."
That presented Thai tourism with a problem. There was no such bridge. They
only had the surviving, fully repaired steel-and-concrete Mae Khlung River
bridge.
So the tourist bureau solved the problem by renaming the river. The Mae
Khlung River became the Kwae Yai River.
The bridge, fully repaired, is still there -- now officially crossing the
River Kwai.

"arjay" schreef in bericht
m...
"Herman" wrote in message
.home.nl...
"arjay" schreef in bericht
news
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
m...
Robert Sveinson wrote:

RAF accuracy was as good if not better than that of
the USAAF if the target was vivible.

Did the USAAF precisely hit any target such as
the TIRPITZ, the Dortmund Ems canal,
the Saumur Tunnel, various Gestapo buildings,
the Antheor Viaduct, Amiens Prison?

Yes.

No! I have never heard of any!

That you haven't heard of any does not mean it didn't occur, it means
you're ignorant.

Then -- with respect -- it seems your place to provide enlightenment.
If Robert Sveinson is ignorant because he has not heard of "any" USAAF
achievements of precision strikes, one bomb per aircraft, in the ETO
then
this implies that there were several such strikes. And your calling him
"ignorant" suggests you know of at least two of them.
Where, and when did they occur?

And suddenly it became very quiet.

Reason? The USAF only started using precision bombing in Vietnam (in the
sixties) when they realised that:
1. Carpet bombing did not make them very popular with the local people;
2. Carpet bombing ws not very effective;
3. Precison bombing was the only effective way of taking out specific
targets (the Paul Doumer bridge for instance).

Well ... as to starting precision bombing only in Viet Nam ... not quite.
The U.S.A.A.F. did make a few attempts during WW2, largely prompted by
Germany's use of the anti-shipping Henschel glide bomb.
The U.S. developed and used two guided bombs -- the AZON (AZimuth ONly)
radio-controlled weapon and the Bat glide-bomb, which was
radar-controlled.
The AZON was used, with limited success, in the ETO against a few bridges.
The device was a tail attachment for a standard 1,000-lb bomb, and it took
several hits from those things to knock down a bridge. No 'one bomb per
aircraft' successes there.
The AZON was also used in the PTO against bridges on the Burma railway.
Such reports as I can find indicate it usually took three or four hits to
knock down a bridge there. I can find nothing indicating how many were
dropped, but missed their targets, nor any identification of which bridges
were attacked.
The Bat glide-bomb -- which depended on centimetric radar, and thus
couldn't
have been built without British research into the cavity magnetron -- was
not a great success. Intended as an anti-shipping weapon for the Pacific,
it kept hitting trees, coral reefs and anything large along a coastline.
The USAF did try some precision attacks during the Korean affair -- six
bridges were claimed destroyed by the so-called Tarzon bomb. That was an
improved AZON system attached to -- guess what? -- the British Tallboy
bomb.

You are quite right. Forgot about those attempts.
Even mr. McNicoll appears not to have heard of them.

In any case, this thread would seem to indicate that precision bombing
during WW2 was performed by the RAF rather than the USAAF.

Regards,
Herman

"arjay" schreef in bericht
m...
"Herman" wrote in message
.home.nl...
"arjay" schreef in bericht
news
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
m...
Robert Sveinson wrote:

RAF accuracy was as good if not better than that of
the USAAF if the target was vivible.

Did the USAAF precisely hit any target such as
the TIRPITZ, the Dortmund Ems canal,
the Saumur Tunnel, various Gestapo buildings,
the Antheor Viaduct, Amiens Prison?

Yes.

No! I have never heard of any!

That you haven't heard of any does not mean it didn't occur, it means
you're ignorant.

Then -- with respect -- it seems your place to provide enlightenment.
If Robert Sveinson is ignorant because he has not heard of "any" USAAF
achievements of precision strikes, one bomb per aircraft, in the ETO
then
this implies that there were several such strikes. And your calling him
"ignorant" suggests you know of at least two of them.
Where, and when did they occur?

And suddenly it became very quiet.

Reason? The USAF only started using precision bombing in Vietnam (in the
sixties) when they realised that:
1. Carpet bombing did not make them very popular with the local people;
2. Carpet bombing ws not very effective;
3. Precison bombing was the only effective way of taking out specific
targets (the Paul Doumer bridge for instance).

Well ... as to starting precision bombing only in Viet Nam ... not quite.
The U.S.A.A.F. did make a few attempts during WW2, largely prompted by
Germany's use of the anti-shipping Henschel glide bomb.
The U.S. developed and used two guided bombs -- the AZON (AZimuth ONly)
radio-controlled weapon and the Bat glide-bomb, which was
radar-controlled.
The AZON was used, with limited success, in the ETO against a few bridges.
The device was a tail attachment for a standard 1,000-lb bomb, and it took
several hits from those things to knock down a bridge. No 'one bomb per
aircraft' successes there.
The AZON was also used in the PTO against bridges on the Burma railway.
Such reports as I can find indicate it usually took three or four hits to
knock down a bridge there. I can find nothing indicating how many were
dropped, but missed their targets, nor any identification of which bridges
were attacked.
The Bat glide-bomb -- which depended on centimetric radar, and thus
couldn't
have been built without British research into the cavity magnetron -- was
not a great success. Intended as an anti-shipping weapon for the Pacific,
it kept hitting trees, coral reefs and anything large along a coastline.
The USAF did try some precision attacks during the Korean affair -- six
bridges were claimed destroyed by the so-called Tarzon bomb. That was an
improved AZON system attached to -- guess what? -- the British Tallboy
bomb.


Just a little nit-picking he
The Henschel (HS-293?) was rocket powered if I recall correctly. It did have
wings but I'm not sure if it glided towards the target. The other
anti-shipping weapon introduced by the Germans was the Fritz-X wire-guided
bomb.
Both weapons enjoyed some succes and led to quite a bit of alarm among the
allies.

Regards,
Herman

"®i©ardo" wrote in message
...
Graham Sheldon wrote:





I seem to remember also after WW2 the British were well advanced with jet
engine technology and virtually handed all the plans, etc over for the
Russians to have a look at. And then the world was shocked when the
Mig-15 showed up in Korea with a Russian copy of the British jet engine.
What is it with the poms? And then there was Duncan Sands (or however
he spells it) and his infamous white paper which destroyed the British
aero industry almost overnight...
Not *all* the plans. The Russians were provided with an example of the
Rolls Royce Nene and Derwent jet engines.

Britain handed over far, far more to America in that line.

And Britain's reward from the U$$A was the same
as the reward from the USSR!




America's first jet fighter, the XP-59A Airocomet, only got off the ground
thanks to the engine and technology provided by Britain.

"arjay" wrote in message
m...



I don't think anyone really knows who finally knocked the bridges down.
But it was Pierre Boulle and David Lean who made them famous -- so famous
that after 1957 tourists went to Thailand looking for the "Kwai River
Bridge."
That presented Thai tourism with a problem. There was no such bridge.

Which is not to denigrate the lives lost building the
Burma-Thai railway, British, Australian, Dutch and native Burmese.
Oh and 360 americans.

The only claim that the Kwai Bridge existed was the following:


"Mitchell Holman" wrote in message
...


And then there is British director David Leans' "Bridge
Over The River Kwai", which credited the British for an
action that in fact Americans accomplished.........

"Herman" wrote in message
b.home.nl...
"arjay" schreef in bericht
m...
"Herman" wrote in message
.home.nl...
"arjay" schreef in bericht
news "Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
m...
Robert Sveinson wrote:

snip for brevity

Just a little nit-picking he
The Henschel (HS-293?) was rocket powered if I recall correctly. It did
have wings but I'm not sure if it glided towards the target.

Well ... once again, yes and no.
The Hs-293 was less a rocket-powered radio-controlled bomb with wings than a
controlled, winged, gliding bomb with a rocket engine having a very brief
burn.
The rocket motor gave the ordinance just enough kick to get it far enough
ahead of the launching aircraft for the operator to see the Hs-293 in
flight and guide the thing without having to shift his position. Without
that rocket boost the aircraft would overtake the bomb in flight.

The other anti-shipping weapon introduced by the Germans was the Fritz-X
wire-guided bomb.

Fritz-X was armour-piercing and intended for use against warships, and was
radio-controlled according to every source I can find.
The Hs-293 was meant for softer targets. There were plans for
wire-controlled and even TV-controlled variants, but none were deployed.

Both weapons enjoyed some succes and led to quite a bit of alarm among the
allies.

Indeed they did. The Hs-293 destroyed or damaged over two dozen allied
vessels.
The track record of the Fritz-X is even more impressive.
Find some of that, and a photo of the weapon, at
http://www.rafmuseum.org/cosford/col...m?missile_id=8.

Regards,
Herman

"Robert Sveinson" wrote in message
...
"arjay" wrote in message
m...

I don't think anyone really knows who finally knocked the bridges down.
But it was Pierre Boulle and David Lean who made them famous -- so famous
that after 1957 tourists went to Thailand looking for the "Kwai River
Bridge."
That presented Thai tourism with a problem. There was no such bridge.

Which is not to denigrate the lives lost building the
Burma-Thai railway, British, Australian, Dutch and native Burmese.

Of course not. Doing so was hardly my intention.
Boulle emphasized the suffering of the captives. Lean made
an adventure movie. People dying of malnutrition, dysentery and various
fevers do not make effective cinema.

Oh and 360 americans.

And -- oh -- a relative handful of Canadians. We had two infantry
battalions helping to garrison Hong Kong in late 1941. Most of the
survivors were put to forced labour on what had been the Dutch East Indies.
Many of those were later transferred to the Japanese home islands. I don't
know how many were sent to Thailand/Burma.
The numbers of POWs of different nationalities forced to work on that
railway unavoidably reflected the relative strengths of the armed forces of
the allied nations in SE Asia in 1942.
Can't capture a lot of Americans if there aren't many there at the time.

The only claim that the Kwai Bridge existed was the following:
"Mitchell Holman" wrote in message
...

And then there is British director David Leans' "Bridge
Over The River Kwai", which credited the British for an
action that in fact Americans accomplished.........

Yes -- but Mitchell (whose contributions here I greatly value) has not
clarified which action he referred to.
Perhaps he meant the destruction, rather than the construction, of the
bridge(s).